Is the beech tree stand of the Slide Brook Basin critical to bear
habitat? Who decides? It was the battle of the experts Tuesday evening,
October 16, as Robert Crean appeared for the final hearing on his
proposed five-lot subdivision covering 16.5 acres on Slide Brook Road.

Though Crean assured members of the Fayston Development Review Board
(DRB) that his proposed subdivision is "a good plan," neighbors and
members of the Friends of Slide Brook Basin group disagreed.

The real contention came in the form of two dueling wildlife
biologists, neither of whom was present at the meeting. While the
experts were not present, Fayston residents concerned about this
subdivision were out in force for the hearing.

PARSONS VS WALLIN

During the hearing, Crean read a report from certified wildlife
biologist Jeffery Wallin of Multiple Resource Management that indicated
that while he did visit the site and find bear-scarred beech trees,
these trees were not 'critical' to the habitat.

Wallin writes, "This pocket of bear-scarred beech is simply that, a
pocket. It is situated on a ridge between the two small streams and
measures 1.75 acres. This plot of beech, though showing signs of
utilization by bears, is too small and distant from Critical Bear
Habitat #1 to be considered significant or necessary wildlife habitat."

The Fayston DRB sought the consultation of Jeffery Parsons of Arrowwood
Environmental. In his report, dated March 24, 2007, Parsons cites that
"Critical Bear Habitat #2 (CBH#2) has a density of almost 30 trees per
acre, a density of bear scarred beech that the Fish and Wildlife
Department considers high enough to be critical wildlife habitat for
black bears."

BEAR HABITAT BUFFER

During the August 29 hearing before the DRB Crean was asked to indicate
a quarter-mile buffer from CBH #2 but failed to do so because the
report he received from Wallin did not indicate that the habitat was
indeed "critical."

"We're missing some pieces here," commented DRB member David Cain.

The vicinity around the proposed Crean subdivision is also considered a
bear travel corridor by the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Parsons reports, "An inadequate buffer will be maintained if the Crean
subdivision is implemented as designed.

Parsons continues, "In addition, the improvement of the Slide Brook
Road will add additional vehicular traffic to the immediate area. The
probable result of both of these actions is that the black bear travel
corridor will be compromised...and could jeopardize the use of the
corridor altogether."

SEVERAL INACCURACIES

Wallin's report references a letter submitted to the DRB by a former
member of the Planning Commission, a letter in which he said there were
several inaccuracies.

He writes, "The letter also emphatically states Mr. Crean's parcel and
the proposed access to it are located within the corridor area. To my
knowledge, no corridor has been identified in this area nor has habitat
that it may access been delineated."

Members of the planning commission were present to dispute the proposed
subdivision based upon its lack of compliance with the Town Plan,
including the maintenance and protection of bear habitats, as well as a
provision which discourages development on or near them.

PROTECTING HABITAT

Crean said several times that if the DRB passed his application, they
would be protecting the habitat, rather than compromising it. He said,
"If this application passes it will always be a no cut, no development
zone."

During the public comment period, however, several neighbors as well as
interested parties spoke out against the proposed subdivision. Ned
Kelley said that he had visited the site and "was very impressed by the
bear habitat" and that the bear travel corridor acts as a funnel into
the Crean parcel.

"We have to make the bears feel safe," Kelley said.

DOMESTIC DOGS

Shayne Jacquith of the Fayston Planning Commission said that the
presence of domestic dogs poses a large threat to the bear habitat.
Jacquith also indicated that the Slide Brook beech stand is one of the
most important bear habitats in the state.

Wallin concludes his report saying, "I have reviewed the conditions of
the mediated settlement agreement and feel that they more than
adequately protect the habitat." He was referring to a settlement
reached by the town and Crean after Crean appealed his 2005 denial for
this project to Vermont Environmental Court.

The current proposal includes a roughly eight-acre lot to be
permanently protected from development. The mediation settlement also
stipulates 100-foot buffers for unnamed brooks and other restrictions
involving barbecues, fruit trees and motorized recreation vehicles. The
settlement also called for moving house sites to less sensitive
areas. According to the settlement agreement, if the town does
not approve this revised subdivision application, Crean's previous
appeal will be reopened.

In a letter submitted to the DRB, Crean writes, "By voting to approve
my application you are providing the residents of Fayston and the
general public a permanent easement for non motorized use of the trail
that borders Lockwood Brook."

NEVER SUBDIVIDED AGAIN

He continues, "Approval of my application means there will never be
more than four homes on this 16.5-acre parcel. These lots can never be
subdivided again."

After a motion was made to move into deliberative session to rule on
the application, DRB chair John Shea opposed the motion and stated that
he "doesn't think this town should have deliberative sessions." Also,
that there was "too much information to move to adjourn."

The motion passed and the Fayston DRB has 45 days to render a decision on the proposed five-lot subdivision.